C S ARUMUGAM Vs. K S VENKATESWARAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS order shall govern these two CRPs. viz. CRP. No. 1467 and 2507 of 2006.

(2.) HEARD the learned counsel on either side.

(3.) THE respondents in both the CRPs. who are landlords in respect of the premises in question filed rcop. No. 39 of 1998 alleging that the revision petitioner in crp. No. 1467 of 2003 was the tenant under him in respect of the premies on the monthly rent of Rs. 2,250/-, that he has not paid the monthly rents from July 1997 to February 1998 and thus he has committed wilful default and he has to be evicted. The respondent therein who is the revision petitioner in CRP. No. 1467 of 2003 entered appearance through counsel and filed a counter. Pending the same, the landlords made an application under Section 11 (4) of the Tamil Nadu buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act. Since no counter was filed, the said application came to be ordered with a direction to the respondent/tenant to make the deposit of entire arrears within the stipulated time. Since the order was not complied with, RCOP. was ordered accordingly. Subsequently, Execution proceedings were taken. At that juncture, the respondent/tenant filed an application to set aside the order of eviction originally passed against him calling it as an exparte order. While doing so, there was a delay of 372 days. In order to condone the said delay, he filed I. A. No. 174 of 2002. On contest, the said application was dismissed. Hence, CRP. No. 1467 of 2003 has been brought forth by the respondent in the RCOP. Pending that I. A. for condoning delay, the revision petitioners in CRP. No. 2509 of 2003 made an application for impleading them as parties in rcop, since they were also tenants and that application, on contest, was dismissed. Thus, there arose the other Civil revision petition in CRP. No. 2509 of 2003. Accordingly, these two CRPs. have arisen before this Court.